The very first study I posted at the start of this thread I always found fascinating. What amazes me most is that the researchers are studying the by product of the monk's meditation. The reason they go into this meditation is not to produce heat but for something else. What? I'm not sure. For now the real reason for this meditation cannot be studied because it would be purely subjective at this point. The by product of this meditation alone is more than enough for the re searcher's to try to explain.

When asked how the monks do this they always reply by saying they are using their "chi". Whether or not "chi" exists these monks are capable of doing something that stumps modern science but at the same time giving neuroscientists a chance to learn and study how powerfull the mind can be.

My only intent for this thread is to show that there is qualified research being done by the top Universities on individuals, mainly Buddhist monks who claim that they can use their "chi". I just hope everybody enjoyed the studies regardless if they believe them or not.

I think the argument on chi is pretty silly. Whether it does or doesn't exist doesn't matter. It's symantics really. When I do my techniques and incorporate the "Ki" aspects of them they work better, period. So, why does it matter if you call it Ki, Qi,Chi, proper body mehcanics/physiology/kenisiology, etc? If you get the desired results, I don't see the point of arguing the terminology of common experiences. One person sees magic, one person sees tricks, one person sees good form in technique, and one sees internal connections of energy to the universe at large; they're all right if they get the results they were aiming for.

Just MHO. Had to chime in because it seems like this argument is perpetually started and restarted and renamed. I don't see the point in continuing arguments so heatedly about what I see as a fight over what the correct name of these functions are.

_________________________
There are no PERFECT techniques, only perfect execution for the situation at hand.
~Corwin

Quote:I think the argument on chi is pretty silly. Whether it does or doesn't exist doesn't matter.

It matters because there are people, other than yourself, who wants to explore new things (no matter how outlandish) and hopefully when found to add them to the general pool of human knowledge, whether for it's betterment or otherwise.

The great western explorers of the last four centuries set off for parts of the then "unknown" world not knowing whether they would fall off into a bottomless abyss at the edge, all for the sake of finding where pepper, gloves and nutmeg came from. These acts of innocent curiosity (fired no doubt by unbridled commercialism) changed the world, east and west.

A chinese king in the 16th century for domestic political reasons put a stop to chinese geo-political explorations by burning all large sea-going ships. The world might have been very different had another king been on the dragon throne.

So you see, the explorations of things like Chi goes beyond the mere individual perfection of a few martial art techniques by a particular martial artist (which in 95% of cases will not be used in a real combat situation anyway) If the claims of chi are real, as the monks have demonstrated to a scientist, then it would be scientific dereliction not to explore it further and see where this thing fits in the general scheme of scientific noesis.

This "chi" moves in my body at will and I have no doubt; my problem is being able to say what exactly it is from a scientific perspective and the scientists are doing me a great favor for one day I will not only feel it, but know what it is as well.

If someone chooses to take a conceptual model as a training aide for physically learning something and hype it into a supernatural force...then all the power to them.

in comparrison, if someone can grow up as moral, just, honest and socially compatable as someone else - and lets say the only difference between them is their spiritual belief of where that strength comes from in order to empower them to be a good/full person...then it's a safe bet the source of that strength is interchangeable.

I don't discount the usefulness of a conceptual model for learning aide - I question hype surrounding it in order to capture and ensnare minds.

Quote: It matters because there are people, other than yourself, who wants to explore new things

I'm all for exploring new things; never said I wasn't. I also didn't say I didn't believe in chi. I only said that arguing it's existance or non existence seems counter productive to me. If you're Catholic and I'm Muslim, what do you think the chances are of one of us convincing the other to convert? This argument over chi's existence is similar. Both sides have strong beliefs, either pro or con, and the arguement just goes in circles. I've just read too many threads of people trying to convince the other side they're wrong.

Explore it. Please explore it. I have, though I wouldn't compare my study of it anything like a fully funded Harvard program. Look into it for YOURSELF and make your own decisions. (that's advice for all not directed at you personally BP.)

_________________________
There are no PERFECT techniques, only perfect execution for the situation at hand.
~Corwin

However I see nothing wrong in having a good argument (if done in a civil manner as befitting people who are martial artists and a gentleman and of course lady, the latter of which generally behave themselves )

I for one am not looking for a 'victory' as the martial arts, be it EMA or IMA, is a matter of self-discovery and hopefully accomplishments and I don't see myself as out to save the martial arts world as I myself can see a long long road ahead though I've been at it for almost half a century.

now all we have to do Is see if we can focus our internal energy in different ways.This study shows that we can control our body conciously, Which I kinda think is just something the human body can do, yay end of story. But this flow of force that supposedly runs through the human body, We have yet to determinea) if it exists?b) what are it's relations to physical matter?c) what laws does it follow?I could ask the question "anybody have answers?" but i can tell no one does.The concept has been around for so long without being disproven that it's hard to ignore,but it has been around equally long without being proven, that it is hard to take at face value.

I can't help but wonder. Are we ever going to find the truth behind it?

I dont think it is silly. Chi is defined in one sense as energy. In other ways people have took the meaning of chi to wards silly. The definition should be made clear.

Quote:

does or doesn't exist doesn't matter.

The term/ definition of chi as energy exists.

Quote:

It's symantics really.

I disagree. Its definition.

Quote:

When I do my techniques and incorporate the "Ki" aspects of them they work better, period. So, why does it matter if you call it Ki, Qi,Chi, proper body mehcanics/physiology/kenisiology, etc?

I think that physical exercise is required. I think in the experiments I have looked at require some form of physical preperation as in the building up of brown fat before the mind could be used. How the monks used their mind I havent even touched on. Yet.

Quote:

If you get the desired results, I don't see the point of arguing the terminology of common experiences. One person sees magic, one person sees tricks, one person sees good form in technique, and one sees internal connections of energy to the universe at large; they're all right if they get the results they were aiming for.

I think there is difference. The tricksters should be recognised. If there is a way meditaion can work it should be explored.

Internal energy connection to the universe isnt such a flowery dream as portrayed. If chi is a term for energy then so is the universe full of energy. Proven by science.

Just MHO. Had to chime in because it seems like this argument is perpetually started and restarted and renamed. I don't see the point in continuing arguments so heatedly about what I see as a fight over what the correct name of these functions are.

I think it is wide open to argument. If people wish to practice what I deem it as tricks then fine. That should be brought out and recognised as such.That doesnt detract from the fact that correct meditation might be a good thing if it can be learned.